[fedora-arm] OpenOffice RPMs

Gordan Bobic gordan at bobich.net
Wed Dec 29 17:43:48 UTC 2010

omalleys at msu.edu wrote:
> Quoting Gordan Bobic <gordan at bobich.net>:
>> Speaking of dependencies - there is a package build circular dependency.
>> Not sure if this should be reported as a bug:
>> openssl needs krb5-devel to build
>> krb5 needs openssl-devel to build
>> I'm pretty sure that can't be right since one has to be built first. In
>> this case I could rpm -ivh --nodeps, but I shouldn't really have to do 
>> that.
> It probably should be reported to the mainline but Im not sure it can be 
> fixed either.. :)

But isn't F12 deprecated now? We're so far behind with the ARM port that 
by the time it's there, it's already deprecated by a Fedora version 2 
versions newer.

> You can probably do a rpm -ivh openssl-devel krb5-devel

IIRC, the reason why I couldn't do that was because krb5 was missing 
from the F12 ARM repository I had to build it, but IIRC, openssl-devel 
wasn't there, either.

Looking at the timestamps, I had to rebuild openssl from src.rpm to get 
the openssl-devel, then krb5. Needed krb5 for some KDE deppendencies, in 
order to build konversation.

I'm more than a little surprised that ARM Fedora is so neglected. The 
build is very incomplete. This is particularly odd considering that all 
the src.rpm packages seem to build just fine.

Ubuntu, OTOH, seem to have much better support for ARM. Are there plans 
to catch up?

> then rebuild one and install, then rebuild the other and install and 
> then rebuild the first one again.. that seems convoluted, but you have 
> to recompile gcc 3 times in order to get the bootstrap right too.

Yeah, I know. :(

> Im not sure exactly how important it is given usually you are using the 
> shared libs anyway.

It's not really an issue, there's always a way around it, but I thought 
that there should be no circular dependencies in either the binary or 
source packages.

>> Speaking of bugs, do ARM Fedora bugs go into the bugzilla.redhat.com or
>> into a different bugzilla?
> no idea. I was trying to figure that out as well.
> It seems like they need to be reported in both places since they need to 
> be fixed eventually by the official package maintainer

Oh, OK. I thought it was the same bugzilla. Doesn't the ARM one feed to 
the main one? Why are they even separate?

Have you got a URL handy for the Fedora ARM bugzilla?

>>> It is probably going to take quite a bit of time to compile. Given
>>> there isn't a compiled version for arm, it will probably take more
>>> work then just a recompile.
>> Well:
>> 1st attempt:
>> OOM-ed with only 512MB of RAM (I wanted to avoid swapping onto SD, it's
>> painful enough without the extra disk I/O it causes).
> fwiw, when i did kernel build time testing with the guruplug. I tried 
> nfs, and a usb/esata drive plugged into either port. nfs with the nosync 
> option was the fastest (50 minutes) and both esata and usb2 were roughly 
> the same time at 60 minutes.

Yeah, I can believe that. NFS over GbE with async is pretty quick. Build 
performance on the Toshiba AC100 is quite good when I LD_PRELOAD 
libeatmydata.so (eats all the fsyncs - I know, I know, at my peril), 
even onto a slow SD card or USB stick. I figured that 2x Cortex A9 @ 
1GHz would build it quicker than 1x Feroceon @ 1.2GHz.

Then again, with it taking so long, distcc is rapidly becoming tempting. 
Since I'm very much meaning to get a lot more involved in this, I'm 
pondering cramming a pile of Panda Boards into a 3U chassis I have lying 

>> 2nd attempt:
>> Failed because the build process used up all 8GB of space on the SD card
>> and died.
> Im surprised at this.. it doesn't -seem- like it should be quite that big.

By my reckoning in terms of how long I think it should take to build (18 
hours or so), it was only about half way through by the time it ran out 
of disk space. So I expect it to be significantly bigger than this.

>> Considering how much I've had to build from src.rpms (shockingly, I've
>> not yet found anything that actually failed to build cleanly), I'm
>> half-tempted to put up a repository of my own when I'm done. Given that
>> ARM netbooks are becoming more popular I'm sure I won't be the only one
>> looking for these.
> I was hoping the f13 would be released for xmas. :) but it appears like 
> f12 is going to be around a bit longer..

I am reasonably eagerly awaiting F13, but will that build be any more 
complete than the F12 build is? If not, I need to be thinking about a 
rack of Sheeva Plugs (or maybe Panda Boards) for building the missing 
packages. :)

In all seriousness, though - it seems that ARM netbooks (and servers!) 
are very much imminently coming in numbers, and I think there should at 
least exist a possibility of a comfortable and complete RH/Fedora 


More information about the arm mailing list